OSR Potions identification in B/X. How do you handle it?

[Maxperson]

I will read the posts in entirety when that user will answer my question if "you can only learn backflips by trying" implies both necessity and sufficiency, and how is that my example worse than doing a interpretation of all "can only" that are found in B/X, and which are all used in entirely different context and grammatical constructions.

If you read those posts, it will answer why "can only" means what he said. Those posts do a better job, because he went into depth on the topic, of explaining it. Up to you, though. I can't make you read them.

 

[Cadence]

Can we stick to potions? I can't see why it is implausible for you that a test fails to identify a magic potion with an effect that only triggers in a specific circumstance. You are not poisoned what effect are you supposed to feel when drinking a cure poison potion?

It feels like there are relevant definitions of "test" that fit with the books use of it (where in one place it sounds like it just happens and where it nowhere discusses potential failure) where the chance of failure could either be not implied or small enough as to be negligible (or at least as not implied or as small as other things we don't roll for).

In the OED, the relevant verb entry for test (the other three seem to be about attesting to things legally, a variant for taste, and a variant for tess=bloke).

• Definition 1 includes: "to assay" (my note: Of course some types of assays can and do certainly fail, others are extremely reliable)
• Definition 2a includes: "to ascertain the existence, genuineness, or quality of"
  They have not the means of testing the statements. - Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, Septembr 591/1
• Definition 4 is: "Chemistry. To subject to a chemical test."
  (The first quote for this one is from a definition of assay).
  The urine..must be tested with litmus paper - G.E. Day translation of J.F. Simon, Animal Chemistry vol II. 135. (my note: lithmus paper is apparently very reliable at distinguishing pH < 4.5 vs. pH > 8.3).
  I have tested the water in all the wells. - M.E. Braddon, Fatal Three vol. 1 v. 98.

So, going to assay's entry as a verb:

• Definition 1.4.d (the first that isn't obsolete or particularly about metal): "To test the strength of a substnce by means of a a test on an organism."
  Drugs..can be assayed with a sufficient degree of accuracy by biological methods. - Lancet 20 October 820/1
• Definition 1.5 (obsolete except historical): "To try by tasting. spec. To taste foot or drink before it is offered to a prince or lord."

Under taste, I note the following definitions that might be even more relevant:

• II.6.a - "To try the flavour or quality of by the sense of taste; [...] spec. to test the quality of by tasting for trade purposes."
• II.6.b - "To test or certify the wholesomeness of (food provided) by tasting it"
• II.6.d - "figurative. To make trial of as by the sense of taste; to try the quality of."

Looking around for other quotes, I offer the following:

• "The mouth tastes words as the palate tests food." - Job 34:3
• "Alex's blindfolded spice taste test" - Food network video [of course some of these are generally set-up to be complicated and others easy; B/X doesn't seem to imply it is trying to be hard]
• "Some people taste cocaine to test its purity" - Addiction Resource
• "How accurate are glucose test strips, ... Contour Next from Bayer: 100%" - healthline.com (presumably rounding to 100% in the estimate; but lets face it there is a non-zero chance a player will die in the act of rolling a die too)
• "Can we tell the difference? Coke, Pepsi, Sprite, 7up, Mountain Dew, Kickapoo My wife and I did a blindfolded test to see if we can tell the difference between these popular sodas" - Keep it Riyal on Youtube (they were 100% on the similar flavors from each other, and I imagine it would be astounding for someone to confuse Coke with 7up or 7up with Mt.Dew)
• "In mineralogy also, the traditional skills of appraising minerals by appearance, texture, smell, and taste gave way to methods of chemical analysis." - Holmes and Levere, eds. (2002)
• "Compare this with the author's description of leaved niter: 'it is not very salty, but has as it were the taste of vinegar when you touch it with your tongue, and it gives a flame on the fire.' It is clear that the Ars Alchemie is here describing a test for differentiating two chemicals..." - Holmes and Levere (eds. 2002).

Over in the Roget's Thesaurus (4th, complete and unabridged):

• 489. Experiment
  489.8 Verbs
  includes: run a sample, test, try, verify, give a try, sample, taste, assay

In terms of gaming at the time, the 1e DMG statements do seem a bit contradictory "However, even a small taste should suffice to identify a potion in some way - even if it is just a slight urge. As Dungeon Master you should add a few different sorts of potions, both helpful and harmful, of such natures as to cause difficulties in identification." But if there was any intent to institutionalize this, it feels like they would make potions come in groups to enable this confusion, have more than 3 bad kind of potion (delusion, poison, philter of love), and more certainly, have provided a table to help in this misleading! I mean, what isn't there a table for that he wants to happen regularly!?!? They gives such a table for cursed scrolls. And why on earth would they make poisons usually be odorless and colorless if they want to trick people into drinking them!?! (Delusion on the other hand makes it sound like you're supposed to pick a different potion for it to taste like, there is a 90% chance they will all agree). As much as I like the DMG, this seems one of those places where the "different potions" remark is poorly conceived given all of the other rules (and unhelpful in interpreting B/X).

Finally, if the hang-up is on the fact that it doesn't say there is no chance of failure (that there is at least some small chance), I also note that the book gives no rules on tripping during the regular movement phase.- and yet apparently "slips, trips, and falls cause nearly 700 workplace fatalities per year" according to OSHA (no separation there) and "stair-related injuries send an estimated 1.08 million people to emergency departments every year" according to Blazewick, et.al (2018). It also gives no chance of failure in eating meals - yet around 5,500 people die from choking in the US each year (NSC.org) with over 10,000 ER visits for it (Saccomanno, et.al. 2003). Although, to be fair, the choking ones are mostly children and the elderly and not adventurers.

 

[Scribe]

Well, that's an interpretation. But no, it doesn't actually explicitly state that potions are identified with a sip.

So this is from the first page, after being told how its done.

This is the explicit text.

"...identify the exact type of item by testing it (trying on the ring, sipping the potion, etc.)..."

So yes indeed it EXPLICITLY states, sip(ping) the potion.

What a wild thread, pretty sure my time here is over.

 

[Cadence]

So this is from the first page, after being told how its done.

This is the explicit text.

View attachment 448213

"...identify the exact type of item by testing it (trying on the ring, sipping the potion, etc.)..."

So yes indeed it EXPLICITLY states, sip(ping) the potion.

What a wild thread, pretty sure my time here is over.

Sometimes...

 

[Vrindlevine]

"If a retainer does the testing, he or she will expect to keep the item."

This is why I would have all retainers sign the contract that treasure is divided after the adventure, much easier to refuse a retainer back in town when their replacement is waiting and of course they might just die tragically after testing the item or on the way back.

If the item kills them, will they still want it, or their descendants?

 

[cbwjm]

"If a retainer does the testing, he or she will expect to keep the item."

This is why I would have all retainers sign the contract that treasure is divided after the adventure, much easier to refuse a retainer back in town when their replacement is waiting and of course they might just die tragically after testing the item or on the way back.

If the item kills them, will they still want it, or their descendants?

I think that chance to die is exactly the reason that they would expect to keep the item. I also think that any DM running the game where you're mistreating your retainers would make it more difficult for your group to find more. Also, refusing to let the retainer keep it still means that you don't know what the item does, presumably you're afraid it will be something bad which is why you didn't test it yourself.

 

[Vrindlevine]

I also think that any DM running the game where you're mistreating your retainers would make it more difficult for your group to find more.

Well its not something you do all the time but it could be worth it to keep in the back pocket, that's basically what OSR is about, edge cases and angle shooting to get any advantage.

I treat my retainers fairly well but an adventuring party is not a democracy, sure if the information of such mistreatment got out there could be reprucussion but its not getting out in any party I would be a part of. Unless your suggesting there would be some sort of skyrim-esque magical "bounty" or "infamy" gained despite none having knowledge of the situation, that is somewhat against the spirit of OSR I would think.

Also, refusing to let the retainer keep it still means that you don't know what the item does, presumably you're afraid it will be something bad which is why you didn't test it yourself.

The retainer (who has knowingly signed the contract), explains what the item does (or at least as much information they can give), then gives it back with the contract stating it will be returned to them upon return to town. Some items of course the effect is obvious the moment they activate it (flaming sword).

Retainers that refuse to sign or attempt to wiggle out of the contract will be punished accordingly with loss of pay and benefits. Fine by me, nothing I like more then bringing a fat stack of treasure back to town and living the high life while a bunch of men-at-arms or workers have their families starve to death in the frozen winter of Nulb because they refused to sign, of course most retainers probably cannot read anyways.

 

[cbwjm]

Well its not something you do all the time but it could be worth it to keep in the back pocket, that's basically what OSR is about, edge cases and angle shooting to get any advantage.

I treat my retainers fairly well but an adventuring party is not a democracy, sure if the information of such mistreatment got out there could be reprucussion but its not getting out in any party I would be a part of. Unless your suggesting there would be some sort of skyrim-esque magical "bounty" or "infamy" gained despite none having knowledge of the situation, that is somewhat against the spirit of OSR I would think.


The retainer (who has knowingly signed the contract), explains what the item does (or at least as much information they can give), then gives it back with the contract stating it will be returned to them upon return to town. Some items of course the effect is obvious the moment they activate it (flaming sword).

Retainers that refuse to sign or attempt to wiggle out of the contract will be punished accordingly with loss of pay and benefits. Fine by me, nothing I like more then bringing a fat stack of treasure back to town and living the high life while a bunch of men-at-arms or workers have their families starve to death in the frozen winter of Nulb because they refused to sign, of course most retainers probably cannot read anyways.

Okay, kind of sounds like I play in more heroic adventuring groups than you do.

 

[Vrindlevine]

Okay, kind of sounds like I play in more heroic adventuring groups than you do.

Those groups were heroic, a lot of those retainers were bandits we pressed into service in exchange for avoiding the gallows.

That being said I have had some pretty nasty GM's in my OSR career so it was sort of expected to act like that. I would guess yours have not been quite as "killer" but who knows?

 

[Lanefan]

Well its not something you do all the time but it could be worth it to keep in the back pocket, that's basically what OSR is about, edge cases and angle shooting to get any advantage.

I treat my retainers fairly well but an adventuring party is not a democracy, sure if the information of such mistreatment got out there could be reprucussion but its not getting out in any party I would be a part of. Unless your suggesting there would be some sort of skyrim-esque magical "bounty" or "infamy" gained despite none having knowledge of the situation, that is somewhat against the spirit of OSR I would think.

The PCs don't have to say a word.

If the retainer survives and gets back to town, you can bet word will spread pretty fast about your mistreatment of said retainer...who by that point will have likely quit being your retainer anyway.

And if the retainer doesn't make it back to town, others might think "Hmmmm, the last guy this person hired never came back -am I really sure I wanna take that job?"

The retainer (who has knowingly signed the contract), explains what the item does (or at least as much information they can give), then gives it back with the contract stating it will be returned to them upon return to town. Some items of course the effect is obvious the moment they activate it (flaming sword).

Retainers that refuse to sign or attempt to wiggle out of the contract will be punished accordingly with loss of pay and benefits. Fine by me, nothing I like more then bringing a fat stack of treasure back to town and living the high life while a bunch of men-at-arms or workers have their families starve to death in the frozen winter of Nulb because they refused to sign, of course most retainers probably cannot read anyways.

Contract or not, how you treat your retainers will almost always have downstream effects on your later ability to hire or keep retainers.